PENTECOSTES vs. ATTY.
MARASIGAN IN RE: JUDGE QUITAIN
Atty. Marasigan lost a motorcycle, subject matter of a criminal case, placed under his care and
custody.
Marasigan’s unauthorized transfer of the motorcycle to another police officer’s custody holds
him administratively liable for simple misconduct.
The clerk has a duty to safely keep all record, papers, files, exhibits and public property
committed to his charge, including the library of the court, and the seals and furniture belonging
to his office.
Clerks of court are essential and ranking officers of the judicial system who perform delicate
functions vital to the prompt and proper administration of justice. It becomes the sacred duty of
everyone charged with the dispensation of justice to maintain the courts’ good name and
standing as true temples of justice.
Marasigan was guilty of Simple Misconduct and was suspended for 15 days without pay, with
a stern warning that a repetition of the same or similar act shall be dealt with more severely.
Notes:
 Misconduct is a transgression of some established or definite rule of action; more
particularly, it is an unlawful behavior by the public officer.
 The misconduct is grave if it involves any of the additional elements of corruption,
willful intent to violate the law or to disregard established rules, which must be proved
by substantial evidence.
 Otherwise, the misconduct is only simple, as in this case.
AQUINO vs. ATTY. PASCUA
Atty. Pascua, a notary public, allegedly falsified two documents.
A notarial document is entitled by law to full faith and credit upon its face, so notaries public
must observe the utmost care to comply with the formalities and the basic requirement in the
performance of their duties.
Failure of the notary to make the proper entry or entries in his notarial register touching his
notarial acts in the manner required by law is a ground for revocation of his commission
As a notary public, Atty. Pascua is mandated to subscribe to the sacred duties pertaining to his
office, such duties being dictated by public policy and impressed with public interest.
Atty. Pascua is guilty of misconduct and is suspended for 3 months with a stern warning.
Judge Quitain failed to disclose any administrative case filed against him in his Personal Data
Sheet submitted to the JBC.
The SC emphasizes the need for honesty and integrity on the part of all those who are in the
service of the Judiciary, often stressing that the conduct required of court personnel, from the
presiding judge to the lowliest clerk of court, must always be beyond reproach and circumscribed
with the heavy burden of responsibility as to let them be free from any suspicion that may taint
the Judiciary.
The Court condemns any conduct, act or omission on the part of all those involved in the
administration of justice, which would violate the norm of public accountability and diminish or
even just tend to diminish the faith of the people in the Judiciary.
He is guilty of grave misconduct which would have warranted his dismissal from the service had
he not resigned during the pendency of this case. penalty of a fine of ₱40,000 and FORFEITURE
of all benefits, except earned leave credits and is PERPETUALLY DISQUALIFIED from
reinstatement and appointment to any branch, instrumentality or agency of the government.
BERNARDO vs. ATTY. MEJIA
Mejia, 71 years old and barred from the practice of law for fifteen years, files a plea for
reinstatement.
Mejia acknowledged his indiscretions, 15 elapsed since his disbarment. At 71, he begged for
forgiveness and pleaded for reinstatement. He has long repented and has suffered enough. He
wants to leave a legacy to his children and redeem the indignity they have suffered due to his
disbarment.
He put up the Mejia Law Journal, a publication containing his religious and social writings. He
also organized a religious organization and named it "El Cristo Movement and Crusade on
Miracle of Heart and Mind."
Since his disbarment in 1992, no other transgression has been attributed to him, and he has
shown remorse. Obviously, he has learned his lesson from this experience, and his punishment
has lasted long enough.
Reinstatement of Mejia is granted.
VELEZ vs. ATTY. DE VERA
Atty. De Vera allegedly concealed his suspension by the State Bar of California (for an act
involving moral turpitude) and appropriating for his own benefit funds due his client.
Considering that there is technically no foreign judgment to speak of, the recommendation by
the hearing officer of the State Bar of California does not constitute prima facie evidence of
unethical behavior by Atty. de Vera. Complainant must prove by substantial evidence the facts
upon which the recommendation by the hearing officer was based. If he is successful in this, he
must then prove that these acts are likewise unethical under Philippine law.
ADVINCULA vs. ATTY. MACABATA
Kissed and took advantage of his client.
Rule 1.01-- A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct.
Lawyers’ possession of good moral character is a continuing condition to preserve their
membership in the Bar in good standing. The continued possession of good moral character is
a requisite condition for remaining in the practice of law.
They are expected at all times to uphold the integrity and dignity of the legal profession and
refrain from any act or omission which might lessen the trust and confidence reposed by the
public in the fidelity, honesty, and integrity of the legal profession.
It is the bounden duty of lawyers to adhere unwaveringly to the highest standards of morality.
The legal profession exacts from its members nothing less. Lawyers are called upon to
safeguard the integrity of the Bar, free from misdeeds and acts constitutive of malpractice.
Censure or reprimand is usually meted out for an isolated act of misconduct of a lesser nature.
It is also imposed for some minor infraction of the lawyer’s duty to the court or the client.
Based on the circumstances and considering this is Macabata’s first offense, reprimand would
suffice.
The complaint for disbarment against Atty. Macabata is dismissed. However, he is reprimanded
with a stern warning.
RULE 138-A
Law Student Practice Rule
Section 1. Conditions for student practice. — A law student who has successfully completed
his 3rd year of the regular four-year prescribed law curriculum and is enrolled in a recognized
law school's clinical legal education program approved by the Supreme Court, may appear
without compensation in any civil, criminal or administrative case before any trial court, tribunal,
board or officer, to represent indigent clients accepted by the legal clinic of the law school.
Section 2. Appearance. — The appearance of the law student authorized by this rule, shall be
under the direct supervision and control of a member of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines
duly accredited by the law school. Any and all pleadings, motions, briefs, memoranda or other
papers to be filed, must be signed by the supervising attorney for and in behalf of the legal clinic.
Section 3. Privileged communications. — The Rules safeguarding privileged communications
between attorney and client shall apply to similar communications made to or received by the
law student, acting for the legal clinic.
Section 4. Standards of conduct and supervision. — The law student shall comply with the
standards of professional conduct governing members of the Bar. Failure of an attorney to
provide adequate supervision of student practice may be a ground for disciplinary action.
CRUZ vs. MINA
The basic question is whether Cruz, a law student, may appear before an inferior court as an
agent or friend of a party litigant.
Yes. Section 34, Rule 138 is clear that appearance before the inferior courts by a non-lawyer is
allowed, irrespective of whether or not he is a law student. By virtue of Section 34, Rule 138, a
law student may appear, as an agent or a friend of a party litigant, without the supervision of a
lawyer before inferior courts.
Petition is granted.
RULE 139-B
Disbarment and Discipline of Attorneys.
Section 1. How Instituted. — Proceedings are taken by the Supreme Court or by the IBP upon
the verified complaint of any person which shall state clearly and concisely the facts complained
of and supported by affidavits of persons having personal knowledge of the facts or by
documents.
The IBP Board of Governors may initiate and prosecute proper charges against erring attorneys.
6 copies of the complaint shall be filed with the Secretary of the IBP or the Secretary of any of
its chapter who shall transmit it to the IBP Board of Governors for assignment to an investigator.
Section 18. Confidentiality. — Proceedings against attorneys shall be private and confidential.
However, the final order of the Supreme Court shall be published like its decisions in other
cases.
GATCHALIAN vs. ATTY. NALDOZA
The acts committed by respondent definitely constitute malpractice and gross misconduct in his
office as attorney. These acts are in violation of his duty, as a lawyer, to uphold the integrity and
dignity of the legal profession and to engage in no conduct that adversely reflects on his fitness
to practice law. Such misconduct discredits the legal profession.
Not only did he misappropriate the money entrusted to him; he also faked a reason to cajole his
client to part with his money. Worse, he falsified an official receipt of this Court to cover up his
misdeeds. He does not deserve to continue being a member of the bar.
Naldoza is disbarred.
BARRERA vs. LAPUT – Suspended.
Barrera seeks the disbarment of Laput for misappropriating several sums of money held by him
in trust for said estate and tried to appropriate two (2) parcels of land, as well as threatened her,
in a fit of anger, with a gun, into signing several papers, despite the fact that she is 72 years of
age.
It cannot be denied that his intent in placing the gun on his lap was to intimidate his client. He is
guilty of gross misconduct and is suspended from the practice of law for a 1 year.
BARRIENTOS vs. DAAROL
Daarol committed deceit and grossly immoral conduct for taking advantage of an underage girl,
promising to marry her, impregnated her, and failed to marry her as he was already married.
Disbarred for conduct unbecoming a member of the Bar on the grounds of deceit and grossly
immoral conduct. Good moral character is a condition which precedes admission to the Bar
and is not dispensed with upon admission thereto. It is a continuing qualification which all
lawyers must possess, otherwise, a lawyer may either be suspended or disbarred.
Daarol is guilty of grossly immoral conduct unworthy of being a member of the Bar and is ordered
disbarred.
TABAS vs. ATTY. MANGIBIN
Notarization is not an empty, meaningless, routinary act. It is invested with substantive public
interest, only those who are qualified or authorized may act as notaries public. It converts a
private document into a public one, making it admissible in court without further proof of its
authenticity.
Notaries public must observe with utmost care the basic requirements in the performance of
their duties. Otherwise, the confidence of the public in the integrity of public instruments would
be undermined. A notary public should not notarize a document unless the person who signed
the same is the very same person who executed and personally appeared before him to attest
to the contents and truth of matters stated in the document.
Atty. Mangibin showed serious lack of due care in the performance of his duties as a notary
public. Because of his carelessness, respondent failed to notice the glaring difference in the
signature of mortgagee in the deed of real estate mortgage from her purported signature in the
questioned discharge of real estate mortgage.
By notarizing without ascertaining the identity of the signatory, he acted with reckless disregard
of his professional duties and responsibilities. He also undermined the confidence of the public
on notarial documents. He breached Canon I of the Code of Professional Responsibility, which
requires lawyers to promote respect for the law and legal processes as well as to uphold the
Constitution and obey the laws of the land.
His notarial commission is revoked, and is disqualified from reappointment as Notary Public for
2 years. Suspended from the practice of law also for 1 year
GARCIA vs. ATTY. SESBRENO – Disbarred.
Whether conviction for the crime of homicide involves moral turpitude.
Section 27, Rule 138 of the Rules of Court states that a member of the bar may be disbarred
or suspended by the Court by reason of conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude.
Moral turpitude is an act of baseness, vileness, or depravity in the private duties which a man
owes to his fellow men or to society in general, contrary to justice, honesty, modesty, or good
morals.
Homicide may or may not involve moral turpitude depending on the degree of the crime. Moral
turpitude is not involved in every criminal act and is not shown by every known and intentional
violation of statute, but whether any particular conviction involves moral turpitude may be a
question of fact and frequently depends on all the surrounding circumstances. Moral turpitude
is somewhat a vague and indefinite term, the meaning of which must be left to the process of
judicial inclusion or exclusion as the cases are reached.
DR. PEREZ vs. ATTY. CATINDIG and ATTY. BAYDO
Atty. Catindig had an affair with Atty. Baydo. He was married to Perez and abandoned her and
their child. – Disbarred.
Rule 1.01 – A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct.
Canon 7 – A lawyer shall at all times uphold the integrity and dignity of the legal profession and
support the activities of the Integrated Bar.
Rule 7.03 – A lawyer shall not engage in conduct that adversely reflects on his fitness to practice
law, nor should he, whether in public or private life, behave in a scandalous manner to the
discredit of the legal profession.
Section 27, Rule 138 of the Rules of Court provides that a lawyer may be removed or suspended
from the practice of law, inter alia, for grossly immoral conduct.
Immoral conduct involves acts that are willful, flagrant, or shameless, and that show a moral
indifference to the opinion of the upright and respectable members of the community. Immoral
conduct is gross when it is so corrupt as to constitute a criminal act, or so unprincipled as to be
reprehensible to a high degree, or when committed under such scandalous or revolting
circumstances as to shock the community’s sense of decency.
ECRAELA vs. PANGALANGAN
“Jurat” is an act in which an individual on a single occasion:
Pangalangan had several adulterous relationships and relations with both married and (a) appears in person before the notary public and presents an instrument or document;
unmarried women, including Ecraela’s wife. (b) is personally known to the notary public or identified by the notary public through
competent evidence of identity as defined by these Rules; 

Canon 1 – A lawyer shall uphold the Constitution, obey the laws of the land and promote respect
for the law and legal processes. (c) signs the instrument or document in the presence of the notary; and 

(d) takes an oath or affirmation before the notary public as to such instrument or
Rule 1.01 – A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct. document.

Canon 7 – A lawyer shall at all times uphold the integrity and dignity of the legal profession and “Notarial Act” and “Notarization” is any act that a notary public is empowered to perform
support the activities of the Integrated Bar. under these Rules.

Rule 7.03 – A lawyer shall not engage in conduct that adversely reflects on his fitness to practice “Notarial Certificate” is the attachment to a notarized document that is completed by the notary
law, nor should he, whether in public or private life, behave in a scandalous manner to the public, bears the notary's signature and seal, and states the facts attested to by the notary public
discredit of the legal profession. in a particular notarization as provided for by these Rules.

“Notary Public” and “Notary” is any person commissioned to perform official acts under these
2004 RULES ON NOTARIAL PRACTICE Rules.

“Acknowledgment” is an act in which an individual on a single occasion: “Principal” refers to a person appearing before the notary public whose act is the subject of
(a) appears in person before the notary public and presents an integrally complete notarization. chan robles virtual law library
instrument or document; 
 chan robles virtual law library
“Regular Place of Work or Business” is a stationary office in the city or province wherein the
(b) is attested to be personally known to the notary public or identified by the notary public
notary public renders legal and notarial services.
through competent evidence of identity as defined by these Rules; and
(c) represents to the notary public that the signature on the instrument or document was
“Competent Evidence of Identity” is the identification of an individual based on:
voluntarily affixed by him for the purposes stated in the instrument or document,
(a) at least one current identification document issued by an official agency bearing the
declares that he has executed the instrument or document as his free and voluntary
photograph and signature of the individual; or
act and deed, and, if he acts in a particular representative capacity, that he has the
(b) the oath or affirmation of one credible witness not privy to the instrument, document
authority to sign in that capacity.
or transaction who is personally known to the notary public and who personally knows
the individual, or of two credible witnesses neither of whom is privy to the instrument,
“Affirmation” or “Oath” is an act where an individual on a single occasion:
document or transaction who each personally knows the individual and shows to the
(a) appears in person before the notary public;
notary public documentary identification.
(b) is personally known to the notary public or identified by the notary public through
competent evidence of identity as defined by these Rules; and
“Official seal” or “Seal” is a device for affixing a mark, image or impression on all papers
(c) avows under penalty of law to the whole truth of the contents of the instrument or
officially signed by the notary public conforming the requisites prescribed by these Rules.
document.
“Signature Witnessing” is a notarial act in which an individual on a single occasion:
“Commission” a grant of authority to perform notarial acts and to the written evidence of the
(a) appears in person before the notary public and presents an instrument or document;
authority.
(b) is personally known to the notary public or identified by the notary public through
competent evidence of identity as defined by these Rules; and
“Copy Certification” is a notarial act in which a notary public:
(c) signs the instrument or document in the presence of the notary public.
(a) is presented with an instrument or document that is neither a vital record, a public
record, nor publicly recordable;
“Executive Judge” is the Executive Judge of the Regional Trial Court of a city or province who
(b) copies or supervises the copying of the instrument or document;
issues a notarial commission.
(c) compares the instrument or document with the copy; and
(d) determines that the copy is accurate and complete.
“Vendor” is a seller of a notarial seal and shall include a wholesaler or retailer.
“Notarial Register” is a permanently bound book with numbered pages containing a
“Manufacturer” is one who produces a notarial seal and shall include an engraver and seal
chronological record of notarial acts performed by a notary public.
maker.
HEIRS OF ZAULDA vs. ZAULDA
It is clear from the foregoing provisions that a senior citizen card is one of the competent
identification cards recognized in the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice. For said reason, there
was compliance with the requirement. Contrary to the perception of the CA, attachment of a
photocopy of the identification card in the document is not required by the 2004 Rules on Notarial
Practice. Even A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC, amending Section 12 thereof, is silent on it. Thus, the CA’s
dismissal of the petition for lack of competent evidence on the affiant’s identity on the attached
verification and certification against forum shopping was without clear basis.
Even assuming that a photocopy of competent evidence of identity was indeed required, non-
attachment thereof would not render the petition fatally defective. It has been consistently held
that verification is merely a formal, not jurisdictional, requirement, affecting merely the form of
the pleading such that non-compliance therewith does not render the pleading fatally defective.
It is simply intended to provide an assurance that the allegations are true and correct and not a
product of the imagination or a matter of speculation, and that the pleading is filed in good faith.
As to verification, non-compliance therewith or a defect therein does not necessarily render the
pleading fatally defective. The court may order its submission or correction or act on the pleading
if the attending circumstances are such that strict compliance with the Rule may be dispensed
with in order that the ends of justice may be served thereby.
3rd Meeting
PEOPLE vs. ATTY. TUANDA
Atty. Tuanda is suspended from practice for violating BP 22, a crime involving moral turpitude.
The offense of which she is found guilty involved moral turpitude." Violation of B.P. Blg. 22 is a
serious criminal offense which deleteriously affects public interest and public order.
Section 27, Rule 138 of the Rules of Court states that a member of the bar may be disbarred
or suspended by the Court by reason of conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude.
She also committed deceit, a violation of her attorney's oath and the Code of Professional
Responsibility under both of which she was bound to "obey the laws of the land."
The nature of the office of an attorney at law requires that she shall be a person of good moral
character. This qualification is not only a condition precedent to an admission to the practice of
law; its continued possession is also essential for remaining in the practice of law
JOSEFINA ROYONG vs. ATTY. OBLENA
Josefina Royong charged Oblena with rape. Oblena is disbarred.
Canon 1 – A lawyer shall uphold the Constitution, obey the laws of the land and promote respect
for the law and legal processes.
Rule 1.01 – A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct.
TAPUCAR vs. Atty. TAPUCAR
Tapucar sought disbarment of her husband, Atty. Lauro L. Tapucar, on the ground of continuing
grossly immoral conduct for cohabiting with another woman under scandalous circumstances.
– Disbarred.
Well settled is the rule that good moral character is not only a condition precedent for admission
to the legal profession, but it must also remain intact in order to maintain one's good standing in
that exclusive and honored fraternity.
Rule 1.01. A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct.
Rule 7.03. A lawyer shall not engage in conduct that adversely reflects on his fitness to practice
law, nor should he, whether in public or private life, behave in a scandalous manner to the
discredit of the legal profession.
A lawyer is expected at all times to uphold the integrity and dignity of the legal profession by
faithfully performing his duties to society, to the bar, to the courts and to his clients.
ACEJAS vs. PEOPLE
Guilty beyond reasonable doubt of direct bribery under the Revised Penal Code.
When confronted by public officers who extort money, lawyers must decline and report the
matter to the authorities. (Canon 1) If the extortion is directed at the client, they must advise the
client not to perform any illegal act. Moreover, they must report it to the authorities, without
having to violate the attorney-client privilege. Naturally, they must not participate in the illegal
act. (Rule 1.01)
Canon 1 – A lawyer must uphold the constitution, obey the laws of the land, and promote respect
for law and legal processes.
Rule 1.01 - A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct.
VELEZ vs. ATTY. DE VERA
Atty. De Vera allegedly concealed his suspension by the State Bar of California (for an act
involving moral turpitude) and appropriating for his own benefit funds due his client.
Considering that there is technically no foreign judgment to speak of, the recommendation by
the hearing officer of the State Bar of California does not constitute prima facie evidence of
unethical behavior by Atty. de Vera. Complainant must prove by substantial evidence the facts
upon which the recommendation by the hearing officer was based. If he is successful in this, he
must then prove that these acts are likewise unethical under Philippine law.
Atty. De Vera is suspended from the practice of law for 2 years.
LESLIE UI vs. ATTY. IRIS BONIFACIO
A lawyer may be disbarred for "grossly immoral conduct, or by reason of his conviction of a
crime involving moral turpitude". A member of the bar should have moral integrity in addition to
professional probity.
Respondent was imprudent in managing her personal affairs (for not exerting effort to fid out if
Carlos Ui was still married with the Chinese woman with whom he has children) However, the
fact remains that her relationship with Carlos Ui, clothed as it was with what respondent believed
was a valid marriage, cannot be considered immoral. For immorality connotes conduct that
shows indifference to the moral norms of society and the opinion of good and respectable
members of the community. Moreover, for such conduct to warrant disciplinary action, the same
must be "grossly immoral," that is, it must be so corrupt and false as to constitute a criminal act
or so unprincipled as to be reprehensible to a high degree.
Respondent's act of immediately distancing herself from Carlos Ui upon discovering his true civil
status belies just that alleged moral indifference and proves that she had no intention of flaunting
the law and the high moral standard of the legal profession.
Complaint is dismissed with reprimand to Atty. Bonifacio.
LINSANGAN vs. ATTY. TOLENTINO – Suspended for 1 year.
CANON 3 - A lawyer in making known his legal services shall use only true, honest, fair, dignified
and objective information or statement of facts. (THFDO)
The practice of law is the most noble profession and not a business; lawyers should not
advertise their talents as merchants advertise their wares. To allow a lawyer to advertise his
talent or skill is to commercialize the practice of law, degrade the profession in the public’s
estimation and impair its ability to efficiently render that high character of service to which every
member of the bar is called.
RULE 2.03. A lawyer shall not do or permit to be done any act designed primarily to solicit legal
business.
Hence, lawyers are prohibited from soliciting cases for the purpose of gain, either personally or
through paid agents or brokers. Such actuation constitutes malpractice, a ground for disbarment.
Rule 2.03 should be read in connection with Rule 1.03 of the CPR which provides:
RULE 1.03. A lawyer shall not, for any corrupt motive or interest, encourage any suit or
proceeding or delay any man’s cause.
This rule proscribes "ambulance chasing" (the solicitation of almost any kind of legal business
by an attorney, personally or through an agent in order to gain employment) as a measure to
protect the community from barratry and champerty.
Lawyers are only allowed to announce their services by publication in reputable law lists or use
of simple professional cards which may only contain the following details:
(a) lawyer’s name;
(b) name of the law firm with which he is connected;
(c) address;
(d) telephone number and
(e) special branch of law practiced
SORIANO vs. Atty. DIZON – Disbarred.
Section 27, Rule 138 of the Rules of Court states that a member of the bar may be disbarred
or suspended by the Court by reason of conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude.
Moral turpitude has been defined as "everything which is done contrary to justice, modesty, or
good morals; an act of baseness, vileness or depravity in the private and social duties which a
man owes his fellowmen, or to society in general, contrary to justice, honesty, modesty, or good
morals."
Homicide may or may not involve moral turpitude depending on the degree of the crime. Moral
turpitude is not involved in every criminal act and is not shown by every known and intentional
violation of statute, but whether any particular conviction involves moral turpitude may be a
question of fact and frequently depends on all the surrounding circumstances
STEMMERIK vs. ATTY. MAS – Disbarred.
Atty. Mas misled Stemmerik to believe that foreigners could own land in the Philippines and
stole his money supposedly for the purchase of land.
CANON 1 – A lawyer shall uphold the Constitution, obey the laws and promote respect for the
laws and the legal processes.
Rule 1.01. – A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct.
Rule 1.02. – A lawyer shall not counsel or abet activities aimed at defiance of the law or at
lessening confidence in the legal system.
CANON 7 – A lawyer shall at all times uphold the integrity and dignity of the legal profession
and support the activities of the Integrated Bar.
DE YSASI vs. NLRC
Respective counsel of the parties disappoint the Court. Both counsel are reminded that their
ethical duty as lawyers to represent their clients with
zeal goes beyond merely presenting their clients' respective causes in court. It is just as much
their responsibility, if not more importantly, to exert all reasonable efforts to smooth over legal
conflicts, preferably out of court and especially in consideration of the direct and immediate
consanguineous ties between their clients. Once again, we reiterate that the useful function of
a lawyer is not only to conduct litigation but to avoid it whenever possible by advising settlement
or withholding suit. He should be a mediator for concord and a conciliator for compromise, rather
than a virtuoso of technicality in the conduct of litigation.
Rule 1.04 of the Code of Professional Responsibility explicitly provides that "(a) lawyer shall
encourage his client to avoid, end or settle the controversy if it will admit of a fair settlement."
CORDON vs. JESUS BALICANTA – Disbarred.
He committed grave and serious misconduct that casts dishonor on the legal profession. His
misdemeanors reveal a deceitful scheme to use the corporation as a means to convert for his
own personal benefit properties left to him in trust by complainant and her daughter.
Rule 1.02. - A lawyer shall not counsel or abet activities aimed at defiance of the law or at
lessening confidence in the legal system.
CANON 7. A LAWYER SHALL AT ALL TIMES UPHOLD THE INTEGRITY AND DIGNITY OF
THE LEGAL PROFESSION AND SUPPORT THE ACTIVITIES OF THE INTEGRATED BAR.

CANON 1 – A lawyer shall uphold the constitution, obey the laws of the land and promote Rule 7.03. - A lawyer shall not engage in conduct that adversely reflects on his fitness to practice
respect for law and for legal processes law, nor shall he, whether in public or private life, behave in a scandalous manner to the discredit
of the legal profession.
RULE 1.01 – A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct.

The Code of Professional Responsibility mandates upon each lawyer, as his duty to society, the
obligation to obey the laws of the land and promote respect for law and legal processes.
Specifically, he is forbidden to engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct. 11 If
the practice of law is to remain an honorable profession and attain its basic ideal, those enrolled
in its ranks should not only master its tenets and principles but should also, in their lives, accord
continuing fidelity to them.12 Thus, the requirement of good moral character is of much greater
import, as far as the general public is concerned, than the possession of legal
learning.13 Lawyers are expected to abide by the tenets of morality, not only upon admission to
the Bar but also throughout their legal career, in order to maintain one’s good standing in that
exclusive and honored fraternity.14 Good moral character is more than just the absence of bad
character. Such character expresses itself in the will to do the unpleasant thing if it is right and
the resolve not to do the pleasant thing if it is wrong.15 This must be so because "vast interests
are committed to his care; he is the recipient of unbounded trust and confidence; he deals with
his client’s property, reputation, his life, his all.”

Attorney Balicanta is hereby DISBARRED.

IN RE: ATTY. RAQUEL G. KHO – Payment of fine.

Atty. Kho’s apparent good faith and his ready admission of the infraction, although certainly
mitigating, cannot negate the fact that his failure to remit judiciary funds for over a year was
contrary to the mandatory provisions of OCA Circular 8A-93. That omission was a breach of his
oath to obey the laws as well as the legal orders of the duly constituted authorities and of his
duties under Canon 1, Rule 1.01 of the Code of Professional Responsibility:

CANON 1 — A lawyer shall uphold the constitution, obey the laws of the land and promote
respect for law and for legal processes.
RULE 1.01. - A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct.

CHUA vs. ATTY. MESINA – Disbarred.

Atty. Mesina is charged for breach of professional ethics, gross professional misconduct, and
culpable malpractice.

CANON 1. A LAWYER SHALL UPHOLD THE CONSTITUTION, OBEY THE LAWS OF THE
LAND AND PROMOTE RESPECT FOR LAW AND LEGAL PROCESSES.

Rule 1.01. - A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct.
Attorney’s Oath
I, ___, do solemnly swear that I will maintain allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines; I will
support its constitution and obey the laws as well as the legal orders of the duly constituted
authorities therein; I will do no falsehood, nor consent to the doing of any in court; I will not
willingly nor wittingly promote or sue any groundless, false or unlawful suit, or give aid nor
consent to the same; I will delay no man for money or malice, and will conduct myself as a
lawyer according to the best of my knowledge and discretion, with all good fidelity as well to the
court as to my clients; and I impose upon myself this voluntary obligations without any mental
reservation or purpose of evasion. So help me God.”
Code of Professional Responsibility
Chapter 1: Lawyer and Society
CANON 1 – A lawyer shall uphold the constitution, obey the laws of the land and promote
respect for law and for legal processes
 Duties of Attorneys:
1. to maintain allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines and to support the
Constitution and obey the laws of the Philippines;
2. to observe and maintain the respect due to the courts of justice and judicial officers;
3. to counsel or maintain such actions or proceedings only as appear to him as just, and
such defenses only as he believes to be honestly debatable under the laws;
4. to employ, for the purpose of maintaining the causes confided to him, such means
only as are consistent with truth and honor, and never seek to mislead the judge
or any judicial officer by an artifice or false statement of fact or law;
5. to maintain inviolate the confidence, and at every peril to himself, to preserve the
secrets of his client, and to accept no compensation in connection with his client’s
business except from him or with his knowledge and approval;
6. to abstain from all offensive personality and to advance no fact prejudicial to the honor
or reputation of a party or witness, unless required by the justice of the cause with
which he is charged;
7. not to encourage either the commencement or the continuance of an action or
proceeding, or delay any man’s cause for any corrupt motive or interest;
8. never to reject, for any consideration personal to himself, the cause of the defenseless
or oppressed;
9. in the defense of a person accused of a crime, by all fair and honorable means,
regardless of his personal opinion as to the guilt of the accused, to present every
defense that the law permits, to the end that no person may be deprived of life or
liberty, but by due process of law.
Rule 1.01 – A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful
conduct.
 Conviction for crimes involving moral turpitude – a number of lawyers have been
suspended or disbarred for conviction of crimes involving moral turpitude such as:
1. estafa
2. bribery
3. murder
4. seduction
5. abduction
6. smuggling
7. falsification of public documents
 Morality as understood in law – This is a human standard based on natural moral
law which is embodied in man’s conscience and which guides him to do good and
avoid evil.
 Moral Turpitude: any thing that is done contrary to justice, honesty, modesty or good
morals.
 Immoral Conduct: that conduct which is willful, flagrant, or shameless and which
shows a moral indifference to the opinion of the good and respectable members of
the community (Arciga vs. Maniwag, 106 SCRA 591).
 Grossly Immoral Conduct: One that is so corrupt and false as to constitute a
criminal act or so unprincipled or disgraceful as to be reprehensible to a high degree;
it is a WILLFUL, FLAGRANT or SHAMELESS ACT which shows a MORAL
INDIFFERENCE to the opinion of respectable members of the community.
Rule 1.02 – A lawyer shall not counsel or abet activities aimed at defiance of the law or at
lessening confidence in the legal system.
Rule 1.03 – A lawyer shall not, for any corrupt motive or interest, encourage any suit or
proceeding or delay any man’s cause.
Rule 1.04 – A lawyer shall encourage his clients to avoid, end or settle the controversy if
it will admit of a fair settlement.
 If a lawyer finds that his client’s cause is defenseless, it is his burden/duty to advise
the latter to acquiesce and submit, rather than traverse the incontrovertible.
 It is unprofessional for a lawyer to volunteer advice to bring a lawsuit, except in rare
cases where the blood, relationship or trust makes it his duty to do so.
 Temper client’s propensity to litigate.
 Should not be an instigator of controversy but a mediator for concord and conciliator
for compromise.
 The law violated need not be a penal law. “Moral Turpitude” – everything which is
done contrary to justice, honesty, modesty or good morals.
 Give advice tending to impress upon the client and his undertaking exact compliance
with the strictest principles of moral law.
 Until a statute shall have been construed and interpreted by competent adjudication,
he is free and is entitled to advise as to its validity and as to what he conscientiously
believes to be its just meaning and extent.
 A lawyer has the obligation not to encourage suits. This is so as to prevent barratry
and ambulance chasing.
 Barratry – offense of frequently exciting and stirring up quarrels and suits, either at
law or otherwise; Lawyer’s act of fomenting suits among individuals and offering his
legal services to one of them.
 Ambulance Chasing – Act of chasing victims of accidents for the purpose of talking to
the said victims (or relatives) and offering his legal services for the filing of a case
against the person(s) who caused the accident(s).
CANON 2 – A lawyer shall make his legal services available in an efficient and convenient
manner compatible with the independence, integrity and effectiveness of the profession.
Rule 2.01 – A lawyer shall not reject, except for valid reasons, the cause of the
defenseless or oppressed.
Rule 2.02 – In such a case, even if a lawyer does not accept a case, he shall not refuse to
render legal advise to the person concerned if only to the extent necessary to safeguard
latter’s rights.
Rule 2.03 – a lawyer shall not do or permit to be done any act designed primarily to solicit
legal business.
 Primary characteristics which distinguish the legal profession from business;
1. duty of service, of which the emolument is a by product, and in which one may attain
the highest eminence without making such money;
2. a relation as an ‘officer of court’ to the administration of justice involving thorough
sincerity, integrity and reliability;
3. a relation to clients in the highest degree of fiduciary;
4. a relation to colleagues at the bar characterized by candor, fairness and unwillingness
to resort to current business methods of advertising and encroachment on their
practice or dealing with their clients.
 Defenseless – not in the position to defend themselves due to poverty, weakness,
ignorance or other similar reasons.
 Oppressed – victims of acts of cruelty, unlawful exaction, domination or excessive use
of authority.
Rule on Advertisements
 General Rule: No advertisements allowed. The most worthy and effective advertisement
possible is the establishment of a well-merited reputation for professional capacity and
fidelity to trust.
Lawyers may not advertise their services or expertise nor should not resort to indirect
advertisements for professional employment, such as furnishing or inspiring newspaper
comments, or procuring his photograph to be published in connection with causes in which the
lawyer has been engaged or concerning the manner of their conduct, the magnitude of the
interest involved, the importance of the lawyer’s position, and all other self-laudation.
 Exceptions/ Permissible advertisements:
1. Reputable law lists, in a manner consistent with the standards of conduct imposed by
the canons, of brief biographical and informative data, are allowed.
2. Ordinary simple professional Card. It may contain only a statement of his name, the
name of the law firm which he is connected with, address, telephone number and the
special branch of law practiced.
3. A simple announcement of the opening of a law firm or of changes in the partnership,
associates, firm name or office address, being for the convenience of the profession,
is not objectionable.
4. Advertisements or simple announcement of the existence of a lawyer or his law firm
posted anywhere it is proper such as his place of business or residence except
courtrooms and government buildings.
5. Advertisements or announcement in any legal publication, including books, journals,
and legal magazines.
Rule 2.04 – A lawyer shall not charge rates lower than those customarily or prescribed,
unless circumstances so warrant.
 A lawyer cannot delay the approval of a compromise agreement entered into between
parties, just because his attorney’s fees were not provided for in the agreement.
 Rule: A lawyer cannot compromise the case without client’s consent (special
authority). Exception: Lawyer has exclusive management of the procedural aspect of
the litigation (e.g. Submission for decision on the evidence so far presented. But in
case where lawyer is confronted with an emergency and prompt/urgent action is
necessary to protect clients interest and there’s no opportunity for consultation, the
lawyer may compromise.
 Rule: Refrain from charging rates lower than the customary rates.
Valid Justification: relatives, co-lawyers, too poor
CANON 3 – A lawyer in making known is legal services shall use only true, honest, fair
dignified and objective information or statement of facts.
Rule 3.01 – A lawyer shall not use or permit the use of any false, fraudulent, misleading,
deceptive, undignified, self-auditory or unfair statement or claim regarding his
qualifications or legal services.
 Violation of Rule 3.01 is unethical, whether done by him personally or through another
with his permission.
Rule 3.02 – In the choice of a firm name, no false, misleading, or assumed name shall be
used. The continued use of the name of a deceased partner is permissible provided that
the firm indicates in all its communication that said partner is deceased.
Rule 3.03 – Where a partner accepts public office, he shall withdraw from the firm and his
name shall be dropped from the firm name unless the law allows him to practice law
concurrently.
Rule 3.04 – A lawyer shall not pay or give anything of value to representatives of the mass
media in anticipation of, or in return for, publicity to attract legal business.
 It is unethical to use the name of a foreign firm.
 Death of a partner does not extinguish attorney-client relationship with the law firm.
 Negligence of a member in the law firm is negligence of the firm.
CANON 4 – A lawyer shall participate in the improvement of the legal system by initiating
or supporting efforts in law reform and in the administration of justice.
 Examples: Presenting position papers or resolutions for the introduction of pertinent
bills in congress; Petitions with the Supreme Court for the amendment of the Rules of
Court.
CANON 5 – A lawyer shall keep abreast of legal developments, participate in continuing
legal education programs, support efforts to achieve high standards in law schools as
well as in the practical training of students and assist in disseminating information
regarding the law and jurisprudence.
Objectives of integration of the Bar
 To elevate the standards of the legal profession
 To improve the administration of justice
 To enable the Bar to discharge its responsibility more effectively.
The three-fold obligation of a lawyer
 First, he owes it to himself to continue improving his knowledge of the laws;
 Second, he owes it to his profession to take an active interest in the maintenance of
high standards of legal education;
 Third, he owes it to the lay public to make the law a part of their social consciousness.
CANON 6 – These canons shall apply to lawyers in government service in the discharge
of their official tasks.
 Public Officials – include elective and appointive officials and employees, permanent
or temporary, whether in the career or non-career service, including military and police
personnel, whether or not they receive compensation, regardless of amount. (Sec. 3
(b), RA 6713).
 The law requires the observance of the following norms of conduct by every public
official in the discharge and execution of their official duties:
1. commitment to public interest
2. professionalism
3. justness and sincerity
4. political neutrality
5. responsiveness to the public
6. nationalism and patriotism
7. commitment to democracy
8. simple living (Sec. 4, RA 6713)
Rule 6.01 – The primary duty of a lawyer engaged in public prosecution is not to convict
but to see that justice is done. The suppression of facts or the concealment of witnesses
capable of establishing the innocence of the accused is highly reprehensible and is
cause of disciplinary action.
Rule 6.02 – A lawyer in the government service shall not use his public position to
promote or advance his private interest, nor allow the latter to interfere with his public
duties.
Rule 6.03 – A lawyer shall not, after leaving government service, accept engagements or
employment in connection with any matter in which he had intervened while in said
service.
 Various ways a government lawyer leaves government service:
1. retirement
2. resignation
3. expiration of the term of office
4. dismissal
5. abandonment
 Q: What are the pertinent statutory provisions regarding this Rule?
A: Sec. 3 (d) RA 3019 as amended and Sec. 7 (b), RA 6713
Sec 3. Corrupt practice of Public Officers. In addition to acts or omission of public officers
already penalized by existing law, the following shall constitute corrupt practice of any public
officer and are hereby declared to be unlawful:
(d) accepting or having any member of his family accept employment in a private enterprise
which has pending official business with him during the pendency thereof or within one year
after termination.
Section 7 (b) of RA 6713 prohibits officials from doing any of the following acts:
1. own, control, manage or accept employment as officer, employee, consultant,
counsel, broker, agent, trustee or nominee in any private enterprise regulated,
supervised or licensed by their office unless expressly allowed by law.
These prohibitions shall continue to apply for a period of one (1) year after resignation,
retirement, or separation from public office, except in the case of subparagraph (b) (2) above,
but the professional concerned cannot practice his profession in connection with any matter
before the office he used to be with, in which case the one year prohibition shall likewise apply.
 Lawyers in the government service are prohibited to engage in the private practice of their
profession unless authorized by the constitution or law, provided that such practice will not
conflict or tend to conflict with their official functions.
 Misconduct in office as a public official may be a ground for disciplinary action (if of such
character as to affect his qualification as lawyer or to show moral delinquency).
 Should recommend the acquittal of the accused whose conviction is on appeal, IF he finds
no legal basis to sustain the conviction.
 Includes restriction is representing conflicting interest (e.g. Accepting engagements vs.
former employer, PNB)
 The OSG is not authorized to represent a public official at any state of a criminal case.
CHAPTER II. THE LAWYER AND THE LEGAL PROFESSION
CANON 7 - A LAWYER SHALL AT ALL TIMES UPHOLD THE INTEGRITY AND DIGNITY OF
THE LEGAL PROFESSION AND SUPPORT THE ACTIVITIES OF THE INTEGRATED BAR.
Rule 7.01 - A lawyer shall be answerable for knowingly making a false statement or
suppressing a material fact in connection with his application for admission to the bar.
Rule 7.02 - A lawyer shall not support the application for admission to the bar of any
person known by him to be unqualified in respect to character, education, or other
relevant attribute.
Rule 7.03 - A lawyer shall not engage in conduct that adversely reflects on his fitness to
practice law, nor shall he whether in public or private life, behave in a scandalous manner
to the discredit of the legal profession.
CANON 8 - A LAWYER SHALL CONDUCT HIMSELF WITH COURTESY, FAIRNESS AND
CANDOR TOWARDS HIS PROFESSIONAL COLLEAGUES, AND SHALL AVOID
HARASSING TACTICS AGAINST OPPOSING COUNSEL.
Rule 8.01 - A lawyer shall not, in his professional dealings, use language which is
abusive, offensive or otherwise improper.
Rule 8.02 - A lawyer shall not, directly or indirectly, encroach upon the professional
employment of another lawyer, however, it is the right of any lawyer, without fear or favor,
to give proper advice and assistance to those seeking relief against unfaithful or
neglectful counsel.
CANON 9 - A LAWYER SHALL NOT, DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, ASSIST IN THE
UNAUTHORIZED PRACTICE OF LAW.
Rule 9.01 - A lawyer shall not delegate to any unqualified person the performance of any
task which by law may only be performed by a member of the bar in good standing.

Rule 9.02 - A lawyer shall not divide or stipulate to divide a fee for legal services with
persons not licensed to practice law, except:
(a) Where there is a pre-existing agreement with a partner or associate that, upon
the latter's death, money shall be paid over a reasonable period of time to his
estate or to persons specified in the agreement; or
(b) Where a lawyer undertakes to complete unfinished legal business of a
deceased lawyer; or
(c) Where a lawyer or law firm includes non-lawyer employees in a retirement plan
even if the plan is based in whole or in part, on a profit sharing agreement.
CHAPTER III. THE LAWYER AND THE COURTS
CANON 10 - A LAWYER OWES CANDOR, FAIRNESS AND GOOD FAITH TO THE COURT.
Rule 10.01 - A lawyer shall not do any falsehood, nor consent to the doing of any in Court;
nor shall he mislead, or allow the Court to be misled by any artifice.
Rule 10.02 - A lawyer shall not knowingly misquote or misrepresent the contents of a
paper, the language or the argument of opposing counsel, or the text of a decision or
authority, or knowingly cite as law a provision already rendered inoperative by repeal or
amendment, or assert as a fact that which has not been proved.
Rule 10.03 - A lawyer shall observe the rules of procedure and shall not misuse them to
defeat the ends of justice.
Rule 12.03 - A lawyer shall not, after obtaining extensions of time to file pleadings,
memoranda or briefs, let the period lapse without submitting the same or offering an
explanation for his failure to do so.
Rule 12.04 - A lawyer shall not unduly delay a case, impede the execution of a judgment
or misuse Court processes.
Rule 12.05 - A lawyer shall refrain from talking to his witness during a break or recess in
the trial, while the witness is still under examination.
Rule 12.06 - A lawyer shall not knowingly assist a witness to misrepresent himself or to
impersonate another.
Rule 12.07 - A lawyer shall not abuse, browbeat or harass a witness nor needlessly
inconvenience him.
Rule 12.08 - A lawyer shall avoid testifying in behalf of his client, except:
(a) on formal matters, such as the mailing, authentication or custody of an
instrument, and the like; or
(b) on substantial matters, in cases where his testimony is essential to the ends of
justice, in which event he must, during his testimony, entrust the trial of the
case to another counsel.

CANON 11 - A LAWYER SHALL OBSERVE AND MAINTAIN THE RESPECT DUE TO THE
COURTS AND TO JUDICIAL OFFICERS AND SHOULD INSIST ON SIMILAR CONDUCT BY
OTHERS.

Rule 11.01 - A lawyer shall appear in court properly attired.

Rule 11.02 - A lawyer shall punctually appear at court hearings.

Rule 11.03 - A lawyer shall abstain from scandalous, offensive or menacing language or
behavior before the Courts.

Rule 11.04 - A lawyer shall not attribute to a Judge motives not supported by the record
or have no materiality to the case.

Rule 11.05 - A lawyer shall submit grievances against a Judge to the proper authorities
only.

CANON 12 - A LAWYER SHALL EXERT EVERY EFFORT AND CONSIDER IT HIS DUTY TO
ASSIST IN THE SPEEDY AND EFFICIENT ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE.

Rule 12.01 - A lawyer shall not appear for trial unless he has adequately prepared himself
on the law and the facts of his case, the evidence he will adduce and the order of its
proferrence. He should also be ready with the original documents for comparison with
the copies.

Rule 12.02 - A lawyer shall not file multiple actions arising from the same cause.